“Stop the Peace Process.” That’s the name of an editorial that appeared this week on Walla!, the most popular of Israel’s indigenous Hebrew websites. What’s surprising is that Walla! is strongly left-leaning and was founded by Haaretz, Israel’s left-wing daily.

The editorial is quite interesting and worth quoting. “Israelis observe with total indifference,” it says,

the political process that Benjamin Netanyahu, Mahmoud Abbas, and Barack Obama are trying to sell them. The streets were supposed to be churning with political activity, pro and con. In the city squares the believers in the process were supposed to be angrily confronting the opponents. But the Israelis aren’t fools. Their sense of smell, which is sharp and sensitive after years of peace follies and piles of corpses, can well detect when a genuine political process is occurring and when it’s a matter of PR for an [Israeli] prime minister who pretends to be a statesman, a president of an [i.e., Palestinian] Authority who’s scared to death, and a U.S. president who’s determined and naïve to the same extent.

Aside from the arguable characterizations of those three leaders, especially the obligatory jab at Netanyahu, Walla! is right. Anyone who lived in Israel in the 1990s recalls the fierce standoffs between those who supported the “peace process” of that time — and in many cases continued supporting it even as those corpses from terror attacks kept piling up — and those who opposed it. In comparison, the situation today can be described as “eerily silent.”

True, left-wing columnists and opposition politicians have been lashing out at Netanyahu for allegedly wrecking peace by failing so far to make all the concessions — first the settlement freeze, now the extension of the settlement freeze — that Abbas and Obama demand of him. But the passion is lacking. In the ’90s, Peace Now would have mustered tens of thousands in the streets beating the drums for a renewed settlement freeze. Now there isn’t a peep out there.

When Netanyahu disingenuously declared his acceptance of the two-state principle, at a typical delay of 17 years, people on the left sobbed with joy, believing the Messiah was knocking on the door. It’s just that Netanyahu’s pacifist declarations came wrapped in a set of conditions that torpedo any possibility of progress, and it looks as if his insincere moves were only aimed at appeasing American anger.

Walla! then starts in on Netanyahu’s cabinet, and particularly on two members of his “inner cabinet” of seven ministers: Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Strategic Affairs Moshe Yaalon, and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman. In a radio interview this week, Yaalon said there was “no chance of reaching a peace deal with the Palestinians in the near future.” In his speech to the UN two weeks ago, Lieberman said “decades” would be needed to reach real Israeli-Palestinian peace.

Walla! grouses:

When … Yaalon declares there isn’t a single minister out of the seven who believes it’s possible to reach an agreement with the Palestinians in the near future, there’s no reason to doubt him. … The prime minister can demur from Lieberman’s statements at the UN [or] Yaalon on the radio … but that’s his government.

Is the editorial, then, just a typical lefty screed? Not quite. Under the subhead “Gaza — Anyone Remember?,” Walla! then turns its sights in the other direction:

The Palestinian side is being just as slick. Abbas can’t bring Gaza to the negotiating table, so Israel is stuck with two Palestinian states, one ruled by Hamas in the service of Iran and the other by Abbas under Israel and Western protection. The reports on the splendid cooperation between the Israeli and the PA security forces conceal a very gloomy reality. Without Israel the PA’s security bodies don’t stand a chance against Hamas. Actually, Abbas is living on borrowed time. … [His] weak status won’t let him agree to any concessions at all, whether on the right of return, territorial swaps, or accepting the [Israeli] settlement blocs. If he does, he’ll be gambling with his life.

Basically, this accurate, coldly realistic passage is remarkable coming from a left-wing source. It’s faulty only in seemingly assuming that Abbas — unlike crafty, malign Netanyahu and his cronies — actually wants peace and is held back by obstacles and dangers. There is much evidence to the contrary, not least previous Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s admission that when he made Abbas an ultra-dovish peace offer, Abbas turned it down flat.

But Walla! has still more surprises in store:

It’s time to put an end to this spectacle. Illusions are a dangerous thing, especially in the Middle East. Unrealistic peace processes, like [former prime minister and current defense minister Ehud] Barak’s Camp David [conference with Arafat and Clinton in 2000], quickly turn into blood in the streets. … You can disagree with Lieberman and Yaalon, but it’s very worth starting to listen to them. Unlike their prime minister, they speak the truth.

So the editorial ends, and one’s jaw drops. Is it saying Netanyahu, Yaalon, and Lieberman are all bad — the latter two just more honest — because they don’t really want peace, or that the latter two are actually pointing to real problems with the Palestinian side? There’s a certain lack of logic, and one can’t say for sure.

One can say, though, that Walla!’s words about Hamas-ruled, Iranian-backed Gaza, and the weakness of the PA, are irrefutable, and the Obama administration appears so determined in its blindness to these realities that it keeps relentlessly pushing a “process” even the Israeli left can’t believe in.

34 Comments, 14 Threads

1.
Terry, Eilat - Israel

What peace process? Are you talking about the charade sponsored by con-man Obama?
You’re on to something here – when you say ”eerily silent” I can tell you that the only word you hear from ordinary people (excuse the language, plse) is ”bullshit” when discussing anything to do with negotiations with the Palestinians. Only some politicians & journalists continue the blah, blah, blah – the rest of us go on with our lives, just glancing at the headlines from time to time.
The truth is that the Palestinian problem is not important. What is important is Iran, Syria, & Hezbollah – and what we are going to do about them.

A viable peace process in the Middle East is impossible until the radical secular and religious Arabs are either killed or jailed. Israel simply must separate itself from these hateful people as much as possible. Secure borders and a strong military are mandatory. The rage, bitterness, anti-intellectualism, and sense of entitlement of the Arab extremists cannot be easily reversed. They are ultimately suicidal—and have little desire to live a conventional life. One cannot live among such individuals.

Lefties can be dishonest in their screeds, as long as the Righties are there to protect them with guns. As long as there is an umbrella to protect them, a warm safe cocoon, they can live in their fantasy, utopian world, and act like ingrateful, petulant children.

Now, however, there is no longer American protection. This President is clearly hostile to Israel. Suddenly a chill has descended. No more warm safe cocoon for you! Now you have to grow up, leaving childish fantasies behind.

His offering was a clear repudiation of all parties. No more playing partisan games, because Israel is suddenly very, very alone. Cold reality, the cure for the common Lefty.

That’s the first time someone actually cares about an op-ed from Walla. Walla may be left-wing but it’s mainly a portal where news and politics are just a very tiny part of the site and do not interest most of the crowd (and the crowd is young and right-wing, just read the talkbacks).
The writers at Walla are 20 something, maybe 30, they are usually ignorant, have no idea about what they are writing, and nobody cares. You should do the same.

Those who are intimately familiar with Israeli politics understand, that ANY admission from the die hard left-of which Walla/Haaretz are locked into-of ‘peace in our time’ no longer on the horizon, realize this editorial for what it is. An admission, albeit back handed, that the right was right all along.That to make peace with an enemy, whose idea of peace is the antithesis of western norms,simply isn’t workable.

The only thing I would add is that Israel’s leftists are also becoming duly frightened for their own safety.Whereas the reviled ‘settlers’ from our heartland of Judea and Samaria, plus the poor ‘cousins’ from S’derot (and other periphery towns) were the previous victims, suddenly they realize that their playgrounds are in play.

Not a week goes by that threats from Hamas/Fatah/Iran/Syria/Lebanon/Hizbullah doesn’t remind them that Tel Aviv is in the cross hairs.

There is nothing more awakening and frightening than making a conflict personal.

I finished Mordy’s book, and it was very sobering and distressing. I hope he will be alright going forward, considering what he has seen. As for me, I had completely forgotten that these attacks continued into 2006. I thought they had pretty much stopped by 04/05. Basically, they went on for 12 years then, beginning with the three buses that blew up in J-lem and TA in ’94/95, when Rabin was still PM. Amazing hatred some of those folks have for us.

Larry, thanks for asking about him.The human spirit is thankfully very resilient. It was only when he retired(at 46)from being up close and personal with the wreckage of suicide bombings, that he felt its effects.He is now back to his old self, busy as a sought after consultant, using his hard found ‘knowledge’ to help industry, security personnel and gov’t agencies to better protect the public.
He is now on a cross country book tour in the US with many requests coming in daily for him to speak.People are desperate for his expertise.
Google his name + Esquire (Detective Morty Dzikansky)and a very interesting article about him will pop up.Also, NYPD Commissioner Kelly honored him in a ceremony in 2006 before an audience of luminaries, telling them that Morty did more to secure NYC than the public will ever know, and for that they should all be grateful.It was an unbelievable and humbling moment.
I consider the endorsements on the back of the book to be VERY important.Make sure you read them.

Yes, I read them, and also got the impression that Mr. Kelly regards your brother as instrumental in having helped New York security. I did root for him to quit his assignment in Israel before he did (though I was glad he stayed in the country). You are lucky that you have much of your family there. Looks like your sons helped bring both you and Mordy back to Israel…

Yes, my ‘boys’(the most fantastic 20 somethings around) made aliyah after graduating, so that made the decision to move sooner, rather than later a lot easier. Morty had every intention to stay on after his assignment, he already had 3 kids starting school here and a life outside the job.
Tell the moderator that it is okay to release my email to you.You can copy this exchange to verify it.

Thanks for pointing this out, Cynic. I lived in Ramat Aviv for two years, 91-93 while working in Israel (I was already a citizen). Though family trauma in the form of my late sister’s illness played a part in my return to the US, so too did incredulity at what Peres and Rabin were saying. One Shabbat I sat in a park in R Aviv, reading the J Post Friday edition. It was an interview with Mr. Peres. He set out his ‘New World Order’ theories of a Mideast without borders in which every Arab child would have a PC delivered by Bill Gates and peace would break out. History was irrelevant and Israel should just merge into a ‘United States of the ME.’

I literally pictured Arab terrorists setting up shop in the towns and villages near the Green Line, and invading Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. For me, it was the final straw (at that point), and I decided to leave. I did not understand how Israelis could stand for such madness…

I think it’s more complex than a binary conflict between ‘good Israel’ and ‘bad Arabs’.

1) I don’t think that the Islamic states have ever wanted an independent and, please note, a democratic Palestinian state in their midst. First, the Islamic, Arab and Persian peoples, are not homogeneous but multileveled and complex, with centuries of inter-tribal conflicts and expectations. Palestinians are long viewed as ‘the lowest of the low’ peoples in the area.
And second, the Islamic states are politically tribal; that is, they have no middle class – power is vested in an elite almost hereditary Set. They do not want an example of democracy, where power rests with the ordinary people, in their midst.

2)My view is that the Islamic rhetoric about ‘their brothers’ in Palestine is largely nonsense. It’s a cover for two more basic issues.

The first basic issue is the lack of economic and political power by the majority in the Islamic states. The tribal elite who control all political and economic power in these non-democratic states, deliberately use the situation as a red herring to deflect their young people from the realities of no power, no jobs, no economic power…in their own nations.
And, the second cover is by Iran, which has imperialist ambitions in the Middle East; its desire is to control the area, including Iraq, SA, Syria, Lebanon…all of it.

3)Furthermore, Israel has no intention, ever, of giving up the West Bank. The orthodox can label it as ‘sacred land of Judea and Samaria given by god’ and they are a powerful force behind the settlers and in the govt. But the real reason is economic: water.

The transformation of Israel from a dry-sustenance agriculture economy, capable of supporting only a minimal size population to an industrial agriculturalism which requires irrigation began necessarily with the influx of massive immigration after WWII. Most of the immigration was European and they not only brought industrial technologies but, as noted, the population size required a different agriculture – one that required irrigation in that particular ecological area.

4) Water is a key and vital element in the area – and it is rarely if ever discussed in any peace talks. Instead, the peace talks focus only on, frankly, the superficial – the emotions, the long-held hatreds, the attacks by both Palestinians and settlers (and don’t deny that the settlers don’t attack the local Palestinians, burn down their farms, harass and etc).

But what is not discussed is the control of the absolutely vital aquifers of the West Bank. Israel cannot allow their control to move into non-Israeli hands. Again, I maintain that the other ME nations are not supportive of a free and democratic Palestinian state.

Israel cannot allow control of this water to pass to a, let’s say, free Palestine…because Palestine, if free of occupation..would be swallowed in a nanosecond by Iran.

5)But I claim that Israel has trapped itself in this conflict. Of course, no self-respecting Palestinian is suddenly going to forgive and forget a generation of occupation, loss of their homes and farms etc. So, insisting that ‘all hostilities stop’ is akin to asking the settlers to stop harassing Palestinians, to stop claiming the land as ‘given to us by god’.

What should have been done? Well, monday morning quarterbacking is..that Israel ought to have, and still could…set up a ‘two-headed federal state’. That is, have ONE federation, with one geographic area run by a Palestinian legislature and one by an Israeli legislature. Rather like two states in one federation. But this federation would be ONE state, ONE nation.

You could have a general Senate where issues common to both would be dealt with: borders, defense, transporation, water, common currency.
Then, each federated state would deal with state issues: education, religion, health, etc.

This federation, which would be democratic, would be a powerful blow to the red herring agenda of the Islamic nations..whose agenda is to divert their people from their own lack of internal power…and to Iran, whose agenda is imperialistic control of the ME.

I see no future for a totally separate Palestinian state. As I said, Iran would swallow it in a nanosecond and use the territory as a base against Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan. And Israel cannot allow itself to lose control of the W.Bank aquifers.

The occupation is not merely operationally dysfunctional, breeding generations of hatred on both sides and being used cleverly by all the Islamic states for their own private internal reasons..but..it will never end. Instead – my suggestion is a federated state.

Now – who would fight that? Heh – Iran would be the first to reject it. Hmm. I wonder why.

I believe your analysis is pretty well-flawed, starting with the ‘equal hatred on both sides’ claim. There is not. Second, it’s not an ‘occupation’ as you describe it; to the extent that folks like you see it as one is a function of several things, including failure of Israeli PR and ‘success’ of all propaganda forces, including in the US, to label Israel as a usurper (at least in the ‘territories’ and often in a more general way). Third, there is no comparison between Arab acts of terror and Jewish home-building. The claim, implicit, that settlers destroy as much as Arab terrorists is proveably false. And you are of course adopting by extension the State Dept line that (basically) building a town or village is morally equivalent to destroying Jewish lives because they are, well, Jewish lives.

I know that you are the poster who always posts a psychoanalytic view of Obama, that is, you mind-diddle him as a narcissist. I agree that he is one in many ways, but a true analysis of his career and policies requires more elements. You make the same error here, while basically claiming a position of moral superiority to ‘both sides.’

In the end, neither you nor the State Dept, the EU, J Street, Obama, the CIA or Daffy Duck will dictate Israel’s borders. And, no, we are not interested in a binational state disguised as a ‘federal’ solution. They will not coexist with us. Enjoy your opinions.

You haven’t dealt with my main analysis, which is based on the political and economic reality of: the rejection by the Islamic states of a Palestinian democracy, the imperial agenda of Iran, and the necessity for Israeli control of the W. Bank aquifers.

Of course I disagree with your attempt to set up the behavior of Palestinians and Israelis on some kind of moral scale of ‘which is worse’. Such a perspective is morally indefensible and also, interminable. It won’t help the situation.

Furthermore, it is analytically incorrect and illogical to compare that which cannot be compared, i.e., Israeli home-building and Islamic terrorism. Nor can you compare Islamic terrorism with Palestinian stone-throwers. Instead, you must compare Israeli home-building and Palestinian home-building and see the ease and availability of both. Compare Settler destruction of Palestinian farms with Palestinian stone throwers.

It most certainly is an occupation; the Palestinians do not have control of their land, borders, water, land, air resources, citizenship, foreign affairs. What else could such lack of control – all of which is in Israeli control – mean other than occupation?

Are you serious? Are you really saying that I am “of course adopting by extension the State Dept line that (basically) building a town or village is morally equivalent to destroying Jewish lives because they are, well, Jewish lives.” What an insulting remark.

Why don’t you try to deal with the issues I raised – such as the rejection by the Islamic nations of a Palestinian democracy, the threat of Iran to a separate Palestinian state, and the aquifers. Instead, as I pointed out, you are making the error of focusing on the superficial level, that of immediate emotions – rather than considering the more complex structure of the area and the people and the history.

“It most certainly is an occupation; the Palestinians do not have control of their land, borders, water, land, air resources, citizenship, foreign affairs. What else could such lack of control – all of which is in Israeli control – mean other than occupation?”

The Palestinians lack of control over their affairs is entirely self inflicted. They are similar to the childish and immature teenager who is not ready to drive the family automobile. Israel long ago proved it was willing to grant them this autonomy. Jews have more important things to do then play daddy to these immature Palestinians.

The Arabs don’t want a Palestinian state. Yes, I absolutely agree, that makes it all even more of a charade and makes Israeli willingness through Oslo to consider one even more tragic.

About water and all that – sure, that’s one reason Israel can’t give up security control of the ‘West Bank’ but it’s not because Israel in 2010 is an agrarian country. It’s not. It’s a technologic, urban culture – too urban in many ways – that needs water simply to survive. But to suggest as you do that this is an unspoken reason why Israel would never allow a Pal state, and thus Oslo must have been a bluff, does not follow. If the bloody Pals would agree to demilitarization and give up their entire jihadi-based program, the issue could be easily resolved. If peace were possible.

As for Israel needing to fashion its very security policy to account for some ‘complex tapestry, maybe a symphony, of inter-Arab relations and rivalries’ (and here I paraphrase), crapola. Michael Totten is better than you at saying ‘because the Kurds/Lebanese/Maronites’ etc. are interesting and have good hummous and are hospitable, Israel must give up the West Bank.’ It doesn’t follow, never has and never will.

Back to the point – I believe, and I speak for myself, that it is our land. It’s a tiny place, the history is rich, the security of Israel will be a nightmare given the geography, the hatred of the Pals and the dangers from the neighbors beyond. The enemies beyond, many of them. Other than that, your comments about ‘settlers’ reveal an antipathy towards religion and/or religious Israelis that doesn’t really deserve much of a reply.

On 25 May 1953 in testimony before the Subcommittee on Near East and Africa of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee the Reverend Karl Baehr, Executive Secretary of the American Christian Palestine Committee stated:

The political picture within the Arab refugee camps is important to an understanding of the problem, and I must say it is of special significance to this committee.

In April of 1952, Sir Alexander Galloway, then head of the UNRWA for Jordan, said to our study group, and this is really a direct quote from what he said:

It is perfectly clear than the Arab nations do not want to solve the Arab refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as an affront against the United Nations, and as a weapon against Israel.

Then, by way of emphasis he said:

Arab leaders don’t give a damn whether the refugees live or die.

This simple fact has been more and more clearly demonstrated as I have on repeated occasions visited the refugee centers. Close supervision of the refugee centers is being maintained by the Arab League so that the presentations from camp to camp vary in no detail. It is only as one breaks away from these formal presentations that one begins to get individual reactions and varied opinions such as those expressed by the preceding speaker. And most visitors have neither the time nor the inclination to try to dig beneath the emotional presentations.[56]

[56] Committee on Foreign Relations, Palestine Refugee Program, Hearings before the Subcommittee on the Near East and Africa of the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, Eighty-Third Congress, First Session on the Palestine Refugee Program, May 20, 21, and 25, 1953 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1953), p. 103.

The Arabs have never wanted anything for the “Palestinians” except to use them in their war against the Jews.

It is my impression that the great majority of olim or immigrants to Israel were actually the sephardim, the Jews from the ARab countries. The European Jews that survived the holocaust were fewerin numbers than the 650,000 Jews from both Morocco, Algeria, Iraq, Iran and other ARab countries. Of course this Sephardi immigration occurred after the Israeli 194 War of Independence.
Most Israelis would welcome a real peace. It’s odd that Obama would even consider trying to force Israel into a deal with Abbas, who decided to suspend elections, what, two years ago? But then again, Obama didn’t stand up for the Iranian dissidents.

But regardless of that, I think it’s vital to note that a dry horticultural economy simply cannot support this massive population. You have to increase your agricultural production and the only method in that ecological situation is by moving to an irrigation agriculture. That means both control of the W.Bank aquifers, open access to the Jordan river, and research into problems associated with irrigation (salt deposits), desertification, research into salt-water purification and so on. The European and US Jews brought with them an industrial technology – very necessary in this transformation from a sustenance horticulture to an industrial agriculture.

And, of course, a key introduction to the area was democracy, which is, simply that power is vested in the civic population rather than in a kin group. That’s the complete opposite of the Islamic tradition of kin-based power – and as I said, the Islamic nations have so far refused to allow the transition from a kin tribalism to a civic national model..with disastrous results for them. And we have only to recall Obama’s travesty – where he refused to support the Iranian demonstrators-for-democracy. Incredibly stupid and arrogant on his part.

A few very important distinctions, Mark. The infrastructure of Israel was laid by immigrants far before the Holocaust, pioneers more than refugees. Yes, most fled lands of persecution but not all. Rabin’s father came to Israel by way of NYC. Golda Meir could have remained in Milwaukee. Waves of immigrants, most (not all) Ashkenazi Jews, built the country up before the Holocaust occurred. Yes, refugees became the dominant ‘theme’ thereafter, both Sephardim and Ashkenazim, but Zionism came out of a yearning for the land and a desire to reconstitute a national ‘form.’

If not for 1) basically open gates to the US until 1924, and 2) closed gates to ‘Palestine’ by the British from the 30s, the population would have been very large indeed, and a state probably declared before Hitler came to power. But there is no doubt that the caution of the Labor leaders may have contributed to all this; it took the raucous Irgun, Jabotinsky, Begin, Shamir, Livni’s parents, etc., to draw attention to the desperation of world Jewry.

The great wonder and tragedy of America from a Jewish-Zionist POV is that it permits an assimilation that calls itself something else. So many Israelis and Hebrew language here now; so maybe in the end our state will disappear because we simply didn’t want it enough – not because of anything else.

Great article. The only quibble here is that ignored is the real author of the entire charade who continually escapes scrutiny–Billary. The Clinton Cabal fans and fuels a process that has never reflected the reality of the region. Hillary was the first to openly “acknowledge” a “Palestinian” state as if it was reality. She continues to push that mush long after the realities of its utter absurdity has been plain to all.

Eventually it will be plain to all that there are currently two states in the region–Gaza and Israel. Let all the Palestinian Nationalists go to Gaza and hang out on the beach.

Netanyahu has been playing ” rope a dope ” with Obama ever since the Prime Minister made his first official visit to the White House. It was obvious then what Israel was up against and the best policy for Israel was to bob an weave until the American voters woke up and gave Obama the royal flush.
In the meantime Iran is closing its grip on Lebanon, Iraq is moving towards Jihadism and Afghanistan is coming apart at the seams.
Nothing causes more damage in the middle east than naivete and that, along with hubris, is the only long suit that fits Obama.
Lets hope the November elections restore sanity to Americas’ foreign policy.

Oops, did I say intransigent? I meant to say inept. You will be hard pressed to find two people who are more unqualified to be POTUS and SOS than Obama and Clinton are. Both of them are just B.S. Artists, blowhards and useless, decadent dilettantes.

The sooner Israelis recognize that, the sooner that they will start to make sensible decision on their own without expecting or relying on any help from this bumbling, incompetent and sleazy administration, who can’t walk and chew gum at the same time, making as big of a mess with their domestic policies as they are with their foreign policies.

We Israelis, not all of us but certainly a majority of us, learned a very hard lesson from the Oslo betrayal and the two Intifadas and that was that the Palestinians are not interested in settling with us peacefully, they are only interested in the destruction of Israel and the genocide of the Jewish People.
Even the hard core Israeli Left realizes this on some level but they will never admit it.
Thus most Israelis know that just like all the other Palestinian Israeli negotiations which have all ended in failure so will these.
The difference now is that this time around the government will probably not make unilateral territorial concessions like Rabin and Sharon did, and like Olmert and Livni tried to.

OK, so Walla came out with a story that no one really believes peace is possible now. That doesn’t seem to be an earth-shattering admission to me, even if it comes from a source on the left. My query is this; In lieu of a peace agreement with Hezbollah fully weaponized, Hamas gaining strength and Iran well on its way to developing a nuclear capability what happens to lessen the likelyhood of a new round of death and destruction that may well pale all that happened in Israel, Lebanon and Gaza 2006 and 2008? It seems to me that peace is the best security.

Guess what? We have a huge arsenal of weapons, if used ‘effectivly’ would squash all the genocidal ambitions of the Islamists in our midst for MANY years.It is important to note, that even though they are ‘undisclosed’ they DO exist.
So, IF the right wing has any sense of survival left, they will apprise the enemy what awaits them if they continue down their jihadi paths.
The Samson Option must be front and center at this time.While the Iranian Hitler won’t be swayed by MAD, the others will.A’jad can be dealt with separately-if you know what I mean.

Yesterday, via Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, President Barack Obama invited emissaries from our enemy, Iran, to participate in discussions with Hamid Karzai to develop an exit strategy from Afganistan, thereby making us look weak, and thereby strengthening Iran’s power and influence in that region, and thereby showing, also, that Obama is certifiably insane. True story.

Not that his sycophants in the MSM will report this huge story this close to the election.

No one in the middle east, including the Palestinian Arabs will be happy until there is no more Israel. I have been in Egypt since Feb. and don’t underestimate the lengths to which Arabs will go to to achieve this including suffering and indeed celebrating their suffering for centuries if need be.
Arabs don’t like Jews or Israel and that is the long and short of it. History is made up or distorted by Arabs until the 1973 War is turned into an Egyptian triumph and Zionists have larger designs on the entire middle east. It gets quite tiresome to listen to people here claim they are not just in favor of muslims but of justice, claiming 50% of people in the West Bank are Christian. Try 2 or 3%. It’s just nuts.